ED:
 
Apologies. Can't understand myself previous post. Trying   again here:
 
I don't understand your questioning here.  It doesn't make much sense for 
instance the question:  "What do you mean by "
Do you have an attachment to your need for 'them' to practise more?".  Need of 
what?, Attachment to what?.  Can you elaborate it, please?
 
ED:...but I suspect that you are saying that persons who do not do sufficient 
zazen are not worth listening to. Yes?
Mayka: No I didn't mean that.  What I meant was that although that is true that 
in order to experience Buddha Nature no requirement of inteligence is 
required.  This wouldn't be applicable while participating in a zen forum like 
this one where intelectual is 99% the dominant power.  And  therefore  there 
wasn't much need of  Buddha Nature energy be present for participation 
but to be inteligent and smart. 
 
No I don't have any objection of people having a good time for as long and as 
the central theme was a nourishement of zen practice as Anthony pointed out. 
But how that could be when the energy of  the practice is not present in us 
most of time as we get engaged in intelectual debates?....
 
Enjoy your weekend 
Mayka
 


--- On Sat, 13/11/10, Maria Lopez <flordel...@btinternet.com> wrote:


From: Maria Lopez <flordel...@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, 13 November, 2010, 22:56


  








Hi ED:
 
I don't understand your questioning here.  It doesn't make much sense for 
instance the question:  "What do you mean by "
Do you have an attachment to your need for 'them' to practice more?".  
Attachemnt to what?.  Can you elaborate it?
 
ED:...but I suspect that you are saying that persons who do not do sufficient 
zazen are not worth listening to. Yes?
Mayka: No I didn't mean that.  What I meant was that although that is true that 
in order to experience Buddha Nature no requirement of inteligence is required 
while participating in a zen forum like this one where intelectual is 99% the 
dominant power then  there wasn't much need  Buddha Nature energy for 
participation but to be inteligent and smart. 
 
No I don't have any objection of people having a good time if as Anthony 
pointed out the central theme is a nourishement of zen practice.  But how that 
could be when the energy of  practice is not present?....
 
 
 
 --- On Thu, 11/11/10, ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com> wrote:


From: ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 11 November, 2010, 15:06


  


 
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Maria Lopez <flordel...@...> wrote:
>
> Bill:
> 
> It meant to be a sarcastic joke.  
 
> But anyway to participate in this forum and most of them last thing important 
> is the practice.  
Mayka, 
Do you have an attachment to your need for 'them' to practice more?
 
> So your point here wouldn't be applicable anyway.  
I am not sure I understand you here, but I suspect that you are saying that 
persons who do not do sufficient zazen are not worth listening to. Yes?
 
> You don't shine because of your practice but because of your inteligence and 
> being very smart, ...
I agree, even though it may well swell Bill's 'no mind' head.  ;-)
 
>People are not interested in zen as zen but to have a good time.  And 
>you provide that.  
> Mayka
And, do you have any objections?
--ED
 
> Mayka,
> 
> You don't need a high level of intelligence to understand my last post. All 
> that's required is that you've read the posts for the past several days.
> 
> I don't think your intelligence level is appreciably different than 
> Anthony's, but that doesn't matter on this forum. Intelligence (as in IQ) is 
> not a requirement for zen. In fact sometimes I think a high IQ is a detriment.
> 
> ...Bill!

 
> Bill:
> 
> You sound mysterious. I wonder what you're trying to tell me. Do remember 
> that my intelligence is in much lower degree than the one from Anthony.
> 
> Mayka
 
> Mayka,
> 
> Oh yes! And Ed has quite an aroma also. But those are just the things you 
> have to put up with if you're going to catch a baby tiger.
> Bill!

 
 




Reply via email to